Sherrod Brown is running for the Senate again while pivoting sharply on data centers he once praised, framing them as a burden on Ohio ratepayers. This piece traces his 2015 welcome of new data center investment, his current campaign rhetoric about grid strain and subsidies, and the policy and fiscal choices Ohio has made that shape the debate.
Back in 2015 Brown celebrated the arrival of a major data center in central Ohio, calling it a sign of business strength and community growth. “This new data center is great news for New Albany and central Ohio. Amazon’s growth in central Ohio signals that this region is not only a great place to do business, but a place where people want to live and raise a family,” he said then. That optimism underlined jobs and local investment as clear upsides to these projects.
Fast forward a decade, and Brown’s tone has shifted into campaign mode, criticizing what he portrays as corporate gaming of the electricity system. “Ohio’s electric grid — big corporations treat it like a game,” he says in recent ads, adding that “[They’re] gobbling up energy to feed their data centers no matter how much it raises our prices. It’s the latest way they’ve rigged the system.” Those are sharp lines aimed at tapping voter frustration over rising utility costs.
The political backdrop is straightforward: Brown lost his seat in 2024 and is now seeking a return, running against the incumbent appointed senator Jon Husted. The match-up spotlights Ohio as a battleground where energy, jobs, and taxes collide. Voters will weigh promises about affordability against claims about economic development.
Ohio’s policy choices have pushed data centers into the spotlight. The state adopted tax exemptions in 2013 that can shield qualifying data center equipment from sales and use taxes, contingent on large capital commitments. That incentive structure helped attract investment, but it also shifted the argument toward whether communities end up shouldering costs for utilities and infrastructure while forgoing tax revenue.
The price tag is part of the controversy. Recent state estimates put forgone revenue tied to these deals in the hundreds of millions annually, with a 2025 figure cited near $1.6 billion. Those numbers fuel calls from some quarters — including Brown’s campaign — for data centers to cover more of their own utility impact, a proposal framed as protecting ordinary ratepayers.
Brown has said he would back legislation to force data centers to cover the full cost of their electricity. “I’ll require the data centers to pay the full cost of their own electricity — not you,” he declared in his campaign messaging. Supporters see that as common-sense fairness; critics warn it could chill investment and cost jobs.
There’s a real policy trade-off at play: data centers bring high-wage construction and tech-related roles and spur local spending, yet their water and energy demands are exceptional and concentrated. Brown’s earlier praise, “I look forward to working to ensure that our region’s burgeoning logistics hub continues to grow – creating good jobs for Ohioans and helping businesses prosper,” highlights the job-side promise he once touted. Now he’s balancing that against pushback from communities worried about rising utility bills and stressed infrastructure.
As Ohio heads toward the next general election, the debate over data centers will be both political and practical. Brown’s reversal on the issue gives Republicans a clear line of attack: question the consistency of promises and emphasize the economic benefits of growth-friendly policies. Voters will decide whether concerns about subsidies and grid strain outweigh job creation and investment when they cast their ballots in November.
